Bonnie, thanks for this article. I've been around and around in what you are offering. So, a couple of questions/observations:
I can see where dialectical reasoning can lead to greater abstraction in an attempt to hold contractions. In what ways does the abstraction itself create a "fuzziness" related to reality? And then, who gets to define that reality?
I can also see that dialectical reasoning creates a synthesis (of the binaries). It seems to me that takes away from the tension of the paradox or contraction and offers an easy or simple "fix" to a challenges or problem. This then leads to the tendency towards reductionist thinking? It would be great to hear your thoughts on this. I think our work is to be able to tolerate the complexities and paradoxes without falling apart.
Finally, the compulsion (my bias I know) towards dialectic reasoning avoids the deeper exploration of the binary itself (A, not A) i.e, the basis or driver of the binary itself.
It seems to me that one of the drivers of the meta-crisis is our problem solving practices - seeking simple solutions, linear cause-effect thinking, etc. And that dialectic reasoning is one of the reasons. (As an aside, dialectic reasoning can be helpful is many circumstances so not trying to negate it)
I realize I might have taken your article way off course so apologies.
This view of western/synthetic and eastern/deconstructive approaches as two variant unfoldings of the mental structure is illuminating.
Bonnie, thanks for this article. I've been around and around in what you are offering. So, a couple of questions/observations:
I can see where dialectical reasoning can lead to greater abstraction in an attempt to hold contractions. In what ways does the abstraction itself create a "fuzziness" related to reality? And then, who gets to define that reality?
I can also see that dialectical reasoning creates a synthesis (of the binaries). It seems to me that takes away from the tension of the paradox or contraction and offers an easy or simple "fix" to a challenges or problem. This then leads to the tendency towards reductionist thinking? It would be great to hear your thoughts on this. I think our work is to be able to tolerate the complexities and paradoxes without falling apart.
Finally, the compulsion (my bias I know) towards dialectic reasoning avoids the deeper exploration of the binary itself (A, not A) i.e, the basis or driver of the binary itself.
It seems to me that one of the drivers of the meta-crisis is our problem solving practices - seeking simple solutions, linear cause-effect thinking, etc. And that dialectic reasoning is one of the reasons. (As an aside, dialectic reasoning can be helpful is many circumstances so not trying to negate it)
I realize I might have taken your article way off course so apologies.
Thanks!!! very good overview; helpful for me!